Interview with Ruchi Singh
A former student of the Master’s Degree in Contemporary Museology and Museum Communication at IULM University in Milan. Ruchi Singh shares her thoughts and experiences, and explains her motivations and background.
Ruchi Singh is a former student of the Master’s Degree in Contemporary Museology and Museum Communication at IULM University in Milan. She completed the Master’s Degree at the beginning of 2025. In this interview she shares her background, motivation, thoughts and experiences.
Can you tell us what motivated you to pursue this online Master’s program with the European Museum Academy?
As someone with a background in journalism and cultural criticism, I’ve always been drawn to how institutions shape narratives and public memory. Museums have a quiet but potent power to influence how we engage with identity, history, and belonging. The EMA program offered a rare combination of academic rigor and forward-thinking curatorial ideas — and it felt like the right time to root my instincts in a more structured museological framework.
Each module covers a very different yet complementary theme. Which one did you find most surprising or thought-provoking, and why?
Module 6, which focused on sound and silence in museum experiences, caught me off guard in the best way. It challenged my visual-centric thinking and made me reconsider how we use our full sensorium in exhibition spaces. The module stayed with me long after it ended — particularly the idea that silence can be an intentional curatorial tool, not just an absence of noise.
Module 4, on the social role of museums, explores lifelong learning. Did this change the way you see the educational mission of museums?
Absolutely. I’ve always believed education doesn’t end with school — but this module clarified just how central that belief is to contemporary museology. It reframed museums not as passive repositories, but as civic spaces that grow with their communities. It deepened my interest in outreach, accessibility, and the museum as a dynamic space of intergenerational dialogue.
The course also dives into innovative themes like participatory museums and the use of sound in exhibitions. How have these ideas influenced your own perspective or practice?
These themes aligned with much of what I was already curious about — but gave me the vocabulary and context to explore them more meaningfully. I now think of participation not just as a buzzword, but as a philosophical shift in authorship and power. Who gets to tell the story? Who gets to listen? And how do you create space for both without diluting the integrity of the experience? These are questions I’ve started asking more rigorously in my own work.
Would you recommend this Master’s to other young professionals in the museum or heritage field? What kind of profile would benefit most from it?
Without hesitation. It’s a great fit for those who are reflective, self-motivated, and eager to explore the intersections of theory and practice. You don’t need to come from a traditional museum background to benefit — in fact, the diversity of professional experiences among my peers enriched the dialogue immensely. If you care about cultural storytelling and are ready to think deeply about its future, this program is a wonderful place to start.